To the editor:
RE: Taseko sues group critical of New Prosperity (Jan. 29)
I find it interesting and ironic that Taseko Mines is suing the Wilderness Committee for damages in BC Supreme Court.
Company spokesman, Brian Battison, asserts the purpose of the lawsuit is “to remove false information from the New Prosperity debate,” and he also states his company is “committed to the truth.”
Although it will be up to the court to determine the validity of Taseko Mines’ defamation suit, I do know that some of this company’s claims about its project have been soundly rejected by two independent federal review panels.
For example, while promoting the New Prosperity Mine, Taseko Mines has continually stated it would save Fish Lake (Teztan Biny). However, the federal review panel, after listening to all the expert testimony, concluded this claim doesn’t stand up.
On the contrary, it was determined the company’s proposed water recirculation scheme and other measures would not maintain sufficient water quality to support aquatic life and the lake’s 85,000 trout (http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p63928/95790E.pdf page 4).
Taseko Mines is also suing the federal government, alleging that Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN) used the wrong modelling to determine seepage from the tailings storage facility (TSF). It appears the company is hoping people will still believe its mining proposal has a chance for approval.
What this company doesn’t tell the public is that, during the environmental review process, the federal review panel made direct requests to Taseko for more information and modelling regarding seepage from the TSF. Taseko Mines never provided the Panel with the modelling that was requested (http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/p63928/87572E.pdf and http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/p63928/90290E.pdf).
Why does this company continue to promote a project that contains significant environmental flaws and that has received strong opposition from affected First Nations?
The sad thing is that Taseko Mines seems to be using these lawsuits as a means to keep the project alive, when in fact it is dead.
Patricia Spencer
108 Mile Ranch
